
I was a bar advocate for 27 years. Here's why I had to quit.
Advertisement
I write personal checks to fund my clients' constitutional rights, draining my savings so poor defendants can compete against well-funded prosecutors.
Seventeen years ago, I carried $20,000 in IRS debt — money borrowed from my future to fund support for my clients. My husband has since paid that debt so I could continue the calling that was destroying me financially.
I eventually stopped taking District Court cases because I was losing money on each case. Superior Court cases paid more, but the stress was much higher. These weren't simple matters — they were complex felonies involving thousands of pages of discovery, expert witnesses, and lengthy investigations. The higher pay barely covered the massive increase in work needed for a proper defense.
After nearly three decades in the industry, I walked away from my three-year contract in February with Suffolk Lawyers for Justice because the work had become financially impossible. A recent work stoppage by defense attorney has forced the dismissal of numerous criminal cases, undermining public safety and the administration of justice.
Advertisement
The financial burden is only part of the story. The work itself is gutting and causes a psychological toll. Bar advocates visit prisons several days a week, often meeting with allegedly dangerous and mentally ill clients.
For example, I once sat in a large cell at MCI- Cedar Junction Walpole's Disciplinary Unit interviewing a client chained to the floor, his body so restricted by restraints he could barely move. I remember him struggling to adjust his eyeglasses while wrestling with all the chains around his body. Correctional officers flanked each side of the room, their presence a constant reminder of the power imbalance that defines every aspect of the criminal justice system.
Massachusetts, the second highest cost-of-living state, according to Forbes, pays court-appointed defense attorneys $65 an hour. New Hampshire, which isn't in the top 10 most expensive places to live, pays its attorneys $125 an hour. Maine pays its attorneys $150 an hour. Why is there such a big difference?
This isn't just about wanting more money. It's also about whether Massachusetts is serious about equal justice. When defense attorneys are forced to choose between paying their bills and properly defending their clients, the constitutional foundation of our justice system crumbles. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel becomes an empty promise.
The Massachusetts Legislature can address this crisis by amending the proposed compensation language in the bar advocate compensation bill filed by Representative Christopher Markey of Dartmouth: raise rates for homicide cases to $155 an hour, Superior Court non-homicide cases to $120 an hour, and District Court cases to $100 an hour. This increase would help the state retain experienced attorneys and ensure constitutional rights remain more than empty promises.
Advertisement
After 27 years as a bar advocate, I can say with certainty: Justice isn't just blind — it's also broken. Until Massachusetts pays what constitutional rights actually cost, the state will continue watching experienced defense attorneys abandon poor clients, leaving our most vulnerable citizens with lawyers who can't properly defend them. The choice is simple: Fund real justice or accept that equal justice is just empty courthouse decoration.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Post
13 hours ago
- New York Post
How the Hunter Biden cover-up continues to this day
In the same week that Hunter Biden burst back onto the public stage to play the victim and lash out at Democrats, we also heard from his one time protector turned reluctant nemesis, Special Counsel David Weiss, with similarly self serving and disingenuous testimony to Congress. Weiss, the former US Attorney in the Bidens' home state of Delaware who presided over the troubled five year investigation into the former First Son, told the House Judiciary Committee that there just wasn't enough evidence to justify charging Hunter under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). His investigators 'couldn't put together a sufficient case,' he said in June testimony released last week. Advertisement That's pretty rich, considering that those very IRS investigators complained bitterly about the obstruction and slow walking they faced on Weiss' watch every time they pursued an investigative trail that led to Joe Biden and the lucrative foreign lobbying Hunter did in his father's name. That's why IRS Supervisory Special Agent Gary Shapley and Special Agent Joseph Ziegler blew up their successful careers and became whistleblowers. Hunter's business model during his father's vice presidency and beyond revolved around foreign lobbying — including for the corrupt Ukrainian energy company Burisma that was paying him a million dollars a year, Chinese government-linked firms BHR and CEFC, and an oligarch client in Romania. Advertisement In fact, the very first email this newspaper published from Hunter's infamous laptop was from a Burisma executive, thanking him for arranging a meeting with his father the previous night. It wasn't just any old meeting, either. Hunter had invited VP Biden to a private dinner at Georgetown restaurant Cafe Milano in April 2015 to meet his partners from Ukraine, Russia and Kazakhstan, as his former 'best friend in business' Devon Archer told Congress. In their upcoming tell-all book, 'The Whistleblowers v the Big Guy,' Shapley and Ziegler point out that, along with that Burisma bombshell, emails and communications they recovered from the laptop showed that Hunter's relationship with DC lobbying shop Blue Star Strategies was tied to his position on the Burisma board and that the firm had been hired 'to influence U.S. government officials on Burisma's behalf.' Advertisement 'These connections raised red flags about potential violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act FARA and any comprehensive warrant would naturally include references to individuals who may have been involved, even tangentially.' And so, when their team drafted a search warrant related to potential FARA violation, Weiss' top U.S. Attorney Lesley Wolf ordered them to remove all references to 'Political Figure 1,' the DOJ pseudonym for Joe Biden. 'Please focus on FARA evidence only. There should be nothing about Political Figure 1 in here,' Wolf wrote in an August 2020 email, according to their whistleblower testimony to Congress. Advertisement Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! Whenever their investigations might lead to Joe Biden they found subpoenas were denied, interviews were canceled or not allowed, and Hunter's lawyers were tipped off before search warrants could be executed. Prosecutors cited bad 'optics' or questioned whether the 'juice was worth the squeeze' For instance, Shapley testified that Wolf refused to approve a search warrant for a guest house Hunter had been staying in on Joe's palatial Delaware estate as part of FARA-related evidence collection. When they discovered incriminating WhatsApp messages Hunter wrote to a business partner at Chinese energy company CEFC on July 30, 2017, citing his father, the investigators were blocked from using phone location data to confirm that Joe really was in the room. 'I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled,' Hunter wrote, demanding $10 million. 'I am very concerned that the Chairman has either changed his mind and broken our deal without telling me or that he is unaware of the promises and assurances that have been made have not been kept.' Advertisement Hunter also threatened that his father would retaliate if the Chinese did not do as he commanded: 'I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction.' Here was Hunter explicitly claiming his father was involved in his business negotiations. Apart from the fact that Joe claimed that he knew nothing about his son's overseas business dealings, Shapley and Ziegler decided there were serious tax implications to the conversation, but they were blocked from pursuing them. They weren't even allowed to find out if Hunter had sent the message from Joe's house. 'The message was clear,' Shapley and Ziegler write in 'The Whistleblowers v. the Big Guy.' 'Although we were investigating Joe Biden's son — who, it seemed, had often involved his father in his shady overseas business dealings — none of our materials were supposed to mention Joe Biden. Advertisement 'Even when we needed material that might be in one of Joe Biden's homes or storage units, we couldn't mention him. The document might leak to the press, and that would make the Biden campaign look bad. 'And in the summer of 2020, there was nothing that the leadership of the FBI wanted less than to make Joe Biden look bad. Doing so might help elect Donald Trump for a second time.' How different was the way the FBI handled Donald Trump compared to Joe Biden. Whether it was the fake Steele Dossier the FBI treated as if it were legitimate evidence, or the raid on Mar a Lago, there was no concern about the 'optics' of investigating a sitting president or presidential candidate when it was Trump. Advertisement As for FARA, the once little-used law against lobbying the US on behalf of foreign interests has been selectively used to target Trump allies and Democrat enemies. For example, Paul Manafort, former chairman of Trump's 2016 campaign, was charged with FARA. So, too, was Gal Luft, the original Hunter Biden whistleblower, who told FBI and DOJ officials in a March 2019 secret meeting in Brussels that Hunter and his uncle Jim Biden were on the payroll of the Chinese. His accurate information was buried and then, one week before Republicans took back the House in 2022, Luft was charged with FARA and other violations. He is currently languishing in jail in Cyprus while Hunter escaped scot free. Advertisement In the last days of his presidency, Joe issued a uniquely tailored pardon for his son, stretching back 11 years and covering Hunter's conviction on gun charges and guilty plea on felony tax evasion charges that Weiss was forced to press after the sweetheart plea deal he'd stitched together with Hunter's lawyers fell apart in the wake of Shapley and Ziegler's revelations. In the end, Weiss forced the IRS to remove Shapley and Ziegler from the investigation as soon as he suspected Shapley had blown the whistle. The Office of Special Counsel last year determined that the IRS had illegally retaliated against the pair by removing them from the investigation after they made protected disclosures to Congress about DOJ interference in the probe. All the obstruction and interference and slow walking past statutes of limitation happened under the benign leadership of David Weiss. So spare us his mealy mouthed justifications for squibbing what should have been the most consequential political corruption investigation in history.


USA Today
2 days ago
- USA Today
Todd Chrisley addresses Julie Chrisley's 'dark' hair and post-prison appearance
Todd Chrisley is known for his candid confessions, and he recently revealed that he was shocked by his wife Julie Chrisley's post-prison outspoken reality TV star told his spouse on a Wednesday, July 23 episode of their "Chrisley Confessions" podcast he was "not going to lie" about the first time he saw her after the pair were pardoned by President Donald Trump. Julie referenced a "horrible" viral picture of her with graying, darker hair — a shift from her famous blonde locks that paired well with the fair-haired family's rise to reality TV infamy — as her husband claimed that she "set the bar low, there was nowhere to go but up." Todd Chrisley, Julie Chrisley released from prison after Trump signs pardon He added "when I first saw you when I got out of that car, I started thinking about going back, but then I thought, let me embrace this — this is a moment." Julie replied, "Are you kidding me, right now?" when Todd admitted "it was a rough moment because I had never seen you dark in my life." Julie then said, "I know that, Todd, but I didn't have any choice." The Chrisley's jabs at each other were well documented and helped them gain a loyal following on their USA Network show "Chrisley Knows Best," which ran for 10 seasons from 2014 to 2023. In June 2022, the Chrisleys — who portrayed themselves as real estate tycoons in the South — were found guilty of conspiring to defraud community banks in Atlanta out of more than $36 million in fraudulent loans, defraud the IRS and commit tax evasion. Julie was additionally convicted of obstruction of justice and wire fraud. In late May, Trump shared that he was pardoning the couple in a conversation from the White House with their middle daughter, Savannah Chrisley, who long advocated for their release and spoke last summer at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee. Contributing: KiMi Robinson
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Roman Storm trial roiled by controversial testimony on stolen crypto link to Tornado Cash
Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Storm suffered a setback Wednesday morning after a federal judge allowed an IRS agent to testify that crypto stolen from Hanfeng Lin, a woman living in Georgia, was ultimately deposited in the crypto mixer. Under cross-examination, IRS Special Agent Stephan George said he could not prove that Lin's scammer deposited the crypto in Tornado Cash. He testified that crypto could have changed hands as it moved across a series of digital wallets. But some of the crypto did eventually make its way into Tornado Cash, the agent said. His testimony contradicted prominent blockchain forensics experts who said none of Lin's money ever went to the protocol. Stolen crypto The fate of Lin's stolen crypto has taken center stage at Storm's criminal trial this week. The Georgia woman was the government's first witness in its prosecution of Storm. On July 15, LIN testified that she lost about $250,000 in crypto to a pig butchering scam in 2021. She attempted to contact Storm in 2022 after a 'crypto recovery service' told her some of the stolen crypto was laundered through Tornado Cash. If her money never went to the protocol, 'she has utterly no relevance' to Storm's alleged crimes, his attorney David Patton said Monday. That could be grounds for a mistrial, the attorney said. If the judge agreed, Storm's criminal trial would end, though prosecutors could choose to retry the case with a new jury. Prosecutors have charged Storm with conspiracy to commit money laundering, operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business, and violate US sanctions. He faces more than 40 years in prison. His case has become a test for crypto privacy as supporters, and Storm's lawyers, argue that he should not be held liable for the smart contracts running Tornado Cash. 'Not qualified' Prosecutors initially asked George to testify that Storm had made millions selling his Tornado Cash tokens in 2022, when government scrutiny of the protocol intensified. They said this is proof that the software engineer knew he had committed a crime. Their plans changed over the weekend. On Friday, crypto security researcher Taylor Monahan said she was unable to find evidence Lin's crypto ever went to Tornado Cash. ZachXBT, the pseudonymous crypto investigator, has endorsed her analysis. On Sunday, prosecutors said they would also ask George to corroborate the claim that Lin's stolen crypto ended up in Tornado Cash. Defence attorneys attempted to bar the agent from sharing that analysis with jurors. 'Agent George is not qualified to do this sort of tracing and his methodology is unsound and not an accepted methodology for attribution in the field of blockchain tracing,' they wrote in a letter to the court Tuesday. 'Last in, first out' But Judge Katherine Polk Failla let the agent testify on the grounds that defence attorneys could prove his supposed incompetence during cross-examination. The agent used an accounting method known as 'last in, first out' to trace the stolen funds, he testified. Over a series of seven steps, 47,000 of Lin's USDT tokens were batched with other crypto before being converted to Ether and deposited in Tornado Cash, he said. During cross-examination, George said he could have reached a different conclusion had he used a different accounting method, such as first in, first out. He also said his method could not prove who owned the accounts that Lin's crypto supposedly traveled through. 'This doesn't prove that the hacker deposited money to Tornado Cash, does it?' Defence attorney Keri Axel asked the agent. 'No, not at all,' he said. But Axel was unable to complete her cross examination on Wednesday. She told the judge it will likely last another half hour when the trial resumes Thursday morning. Protocol control Philip Werlau, a senior investigator at blockchain analytics firm took up the majority of Wednesday's testimony. Werlau testified that aspects of the Tornado Cash protocol could have been changed by Storm and his co-founders. Specifically, the protocol's so-called relay system had code that could have been changed to deter money laundering, Werlau said. While those changes required approval from Tornado Cash token holders, Storm and his co-founders had enough tokens to determine the outcome of any vote, according to Werlau. Moreover, about 99% of all deposits to Tornado Cash relied on the relay system, according to Werlau. Those that did not use the system could not benefit from the anonymity Tornado Cash provides, as it would be easy to link crypto deposited directly in the protocol to crypto withdrawn from the protocol, he added. Tornado Cash founders did take steps to limit money laundering. In 2020, they blocked access to the Tornado Cash website for users from certain countries. In 2022, they blocked access to sanctioned crypto wallets. But both of those measures were easily circumvented, according to Werlau. Even if sanctioned wallets could not use the website, their owners could still access the protocol and its relay system through the command-line interface on their computers. 'They closed the UI [website] door but they left the CLI door open,' Werlau said. Prosecutors said they expect to finish their portion of the trial Thursday morning. Defence attorneys said they could end their portion as early as Monday — unless Storm himself testifies, a high-risk, high-reward strategy that failed crypto fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried in his November 2023 trial. Bankman-Fried withered under cross-examination, appearing evasive and drawing a rebuke from the judge. He was eventually convicted on all seven counts and sentenced to 25 years in prison. Aleks Gilbert is DL News' New York-based DeFi Correspondent. Reach out to him with tips at aleks@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data